Latest Information

Last week, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) released the results of their Inquiry into recruitment and employment in the meat and poultry processing sector.  These results have uncovered evidence of widespread mistreatment and exploitation of agency workers within this sector, by both agencies and by meat processing factories themselves.

This report was based on a range of evidence, collected from workers (working in the meat processing industry and in other sectors), supermarkets, meat and poultry processing firms, work agencies, unions, industry representative bodies, regulators and government departments.

The report cemented the figures from Unite’s campaign against some supermarkets in 2009.   Migrant- agency workers represent 30% overall of employees in this industry (out of agency staff working in the industry 70% are migrant workers). The report notes significant discontent amongst agency workers.   Of the 260 workers who gave evidence to the inquiry 8/10 workers claimed to be treated differently to permanent staff, this included poorer pay, allocation of the least desirable jobs, and being treated like ‘second-class citizens’ in the workplace.

The problems that agency workers face is a dedicated chapter in this report, there are too many issues to mention in this blog alone, although all issues that workers face breach minimum ethical trading standards and basic human rights.  Worryingly, many workers had little knowledge of their rights and feared raising concerns would lead to dismissal:

· The staff also reported being refused toilet breaks and so having to urinate while on the production line.

· 1in 7 of agency worker paid to find employment

· There was evidence that some women had been instantly dismissed when they became pregnant

· One-fifth of workers reported being pushed, kicked or having things thrown at them by line managers, One-third had experienced or witnessed verbal abuse.

Only 4/260 workers preferred agency work to direct employment: Some workers felt that permanent contracts were awarded on the basis on nepotism or nationality.

This report also explores the conditions that have led to the industry being so racially divided: one noticeable reason being that the working conditions are so unpleasant and strenuous, that meat processing companies don’t have British workers applying to vacancies anyway.  The report has added fuel to the flames for both left and right wing activists.  Impactt would like to note that the high proportion of migrant and agency workers in this sector confirms the presence of poor labour standards.  This racially motivated political debate is centered on a symptom and not the root problem- the papers are missing the point. Poor labour standards should be the focus, not the race of the workers.

Impactt thinks that more focus should have been placed on the impact of the Agency Workers Directive (AWD 2011).  The AWD is addressed briefly in this report, but it may have been interesting to hear opinions from processing firms and agents about whether they have plans to accommodate this major change in labour law.

Impactt agrees that the primary source of demand, the supermarkets, should push harder for improvements in the industry, their auditing process should be more holistic. Impactt notes that the report misses a trick by not emphasizing enough the role that auditors have in improving standards.  The majority of auditing processes are mechanized, tick-box factory tours, with no scope in getting to the crux of the issue. Auditors should focus to a greater extent on off-site workers interviews to understand issues relevant to the site.

Impactt agrees that agencies such as the Gangmasters’ Licensing Authority (GLA) are instrumental in investigating agency labour rights; this authority however is  understaffed, despite 2/3 of agencies agreeing that the GLA has improved standards by preventing unscrupulous agencies from operating.